News

Just a warning that this post will have upsetting content due to the nature of the incident. Please excuse all the mental masturbation I’ll be debasing myself on over this post. Hover over red text to see small notes and relevant warnings.

A map of where reported sexual assaults on the UBC Vancouver campus in 2013 occurred. Source: RCMP (from Globe and Mail)

For almost every weekend since the end of September, a report of a sexual assault was filed ([1][2][3][4][5]). If the pattern holds (which hopefully it won’t) another attempt will be made sometime this weekend. While the presence of at least one sexual assailant on campus who appears to be becoming more comfortable as the semester goes on is scary enough, I am somewhat dismayed by the response by campus inhabitants. Due to the controversial topic being discussed, reader discretion is strongly and strictly advised. Continue reading →

It would have been nasty by itself, but then you get this video where the hosts on Sunrise actually find it funny that the guy’s getting pussy-whipped. It’s fascinating to see how the double-standard for sex-on-sex violence still exists: men are vilified if they hit a woman, but it’s somehow less serious if it’s the other way around. The question now is “why?”

I suppose a major part of this has to do with a patriarchal culture: women are considered to be objects and men are supposed to be strong and independent. Anything that threatens the image of a strong man is belittled by anything that suggests that he is “weak.” There is no way a woman can assault a man. These preconceptions have been challenged in this century so far with incidents like testicle pulling.

This is where I’m going to play devil’s advocate: with the advent of fighting for equal rights for everyone, certain pre-existing societal conventions should be revoked. Just as negative attitudes towards groups of people due to an inherent change that cannot be changed are frowned upon, positive attitudes towards those same groups of people associated with the trait that they have should be discouraged as well.

What does it mean in this case? Only circumstance and context should be considered. Sex, sexual orientation, race, etc. are merely qualifiers that describe the involved and should not be used to alter one’s judgment of them.

It’s strange to see that both use the word “YOUNG” as an acronym in both of their chants, and almost each letter stands for the same thing, Representatives of both universities claim it to be tradition:

“Like I said, it’s been going on for years,”

–Jared Perry, The Globe and Mail

“I think it’s all passed down year after year … from forever, I guess”

While improbable things can happen, the likelihood of these two chants being around in their respective communities for years before someone turned on their head and noticed is low. One could make an argument that this chant existed at some other university and was adapted for other institutions as it disseminated, but the fact that these two incidents occurred within days of each other is very suspect.

Another issue is how no one thought it odd to have a chant about boning underage girls. If people have been around for a long time and lived with the chant, sure, it might be normalised and longtimers would be desensitised to it, but for these chants to exist for years unnoticed in a society that is becoming more egalitarian is near-impossible, especially if first-years are subject to them. I would like to think that newcomers to these universities have been exposed to “rape isn’t something to joke about” sentiments. Something as crass as this would have had more social media attention on it in previous years if it really occurred for a long time.

What do I think happened? Some kid thought it was hilarious to make this chant for wherever they were, and someone elsewhere got wind of it and thought it was funny too. From there it spread, all the way over to UBC.

The most shocking part of all of this is the disparity between the responses the two university representatives made:

Perry’s:

“We didn’t see the message,” Mr. Perry said. “As odd as it sounds we didn’t see the message … we now realize that it’s extremely serious and we don’t want it to happen any more.”

-Globe and Mail

Chen’s:

“We had problems a very long time ago with the cheers being public in a sort of way and the dean seeing,” Chen said. “We let the groups know: if it happens in the group, it has to stay in the group.”

–The Ubyssey

While Perry seems to be repentant for his nonaction, Chen appears to be more worried about this behaviour being discovered by an outside party. This suggests one of two things:

She is fine with the chant as long as it can’t be traced back to the committee, effectively minimising the problem of sexual assault.

She admits that this incident is out of her control and is trying to minimise its impact, effectively calling her leadership management skills into question.

There’s a lot of inter-faculty teasing that goes around at UBC: Arts kids being told their diploma is worthless, engineers being virgins, etc, and in jest that’s fine; hardly anyone takes such claims seriously. But a social issue like sexual assault (of a minor, no less) is not funny, especially when most of the population of the place you’re in is undergoing the sexual experimentation phase of their life.

In any case, it doesn’t reflect well on Sauder’s reputation. I hope (in Sauder’s best interests) that they will have a personnel shuffle going and a better public apology instead of disavowing any responsibility to what some frosh leaders may say; as a fraction of the CUS, the frosh events will reflect on the faculty as a whole, and to claim otherwise is foolish.

UPDATE [09/09/13]:

The vandalism begins. Taken from Reddit link.

[UPDATE Sept. 18th, 2013]

UBC has just published a fact-finding report today detailing what the fact-finding team has discovered in CUS FROSH.

Yesterday the grandmother of 13-year-old Max in Newcastle, Ont. received an anonymous letter urging her to either move him into another neighbourhood or put him down like a diseased animal.

The letter in question. Source: CBC

The most irritating thing about this is that Max doesn’t even live in the neighbourhood; he lives with his parents in another city and only comes up to visit his grandmother, though judging by the letter “[y]ou selfishly put your kid out everyday” (which seems like an exaggeration from someone in hysteria), this seems to be a very common occurrence. I’m almost ashamed that this was written by a Canadian. We are (or should be) an inclusive society (like the States) that welcomes all creeds of people.

This letter has been analysed and has been found to “[fall] below the threshold for a hate crime,” though it is still being considered as to if it violates other sections of the Criminal Code. It could be construed as harassment or a death threat, though the euthanasia quip seems to have been added in as an angry outburst instead of as an actual intended remark.

There is already support rallying around Max and condemnation against the writer of this letter.